Search

There is little evidence that, for people with aphasia, successful outcomes following lexical retrieval treatment generalise beyond single word retrieval to sentence production or daily communication. This study aimed to develop greater understanding of the mechanisms of generalisation. We employed a cueing task to simulate the effects of lexical retrieval treatment. A single noun or verb was provided and the effect on production of a corresponding verb phrase examined. Sixteen individuals with primary progressive aphasia (PPA) were asked to produce verb phrases to describe action pictures accompanied by i) a verb cue where a spoken and written verb was also presented with the picture; ii) a noun cue where a spoken and written noun was presented with the picture; iii) a no cue condition where only the picture was presented. Across the case series, both verb and noun cueing improved verb phrase production relative to no cue, with verb cueing being most effective. At the level of the single case, thirteen individuals showed significantly increased production of verb phrases with verb cueing, and seven individuals with noun cueing. In addition, seven individuals showed significantly greater benefit from verb cueing compared to noun cueing, and none showed the reverse. This suggests that improvements in verb phrase production may also be achievable following treatment-induced improvements in lexical retrieval. Greater benefit from verb cues than noun cues raises important theoretical issues regarding sentence construction and clinical issues around the most effective treatment techniques for people with aphasia.

Impaired verbal ‘phonological’ short-term memory is considered a cardinal feature of the logopenic variant of primary progressive aphasia (lv-PPA) and is assumed to underpin most of the language deficits in this syndrome. Clinically, examination of verbal short-term memory in individuals presenting with PPA is common practice and serves two objectives: (i) to help understand the possible mechanisms underlying the patient’s language profile and (ii) to help differentiate lv-PPA from other PPA variants or from other dementia syndromes. Distinction between lv-PPA and the non-fluent variant of PPA (nfv-PPA), however, can be especially challenging due to overlapping language profiles and comparable psychometric performances on verbal short-term memory tests. Here, we present case vignettes of the three PPA variants (lv-PPA, nfv-PPA, and the semantic variant (sv-PPA)) and typical Alzheimer’s disease (AD). These vignettes provide a detailed description of the short-term and working memory profiles typically found in these patients and highlight how speech output and language comprehension deficits across the PPA variants differentially interfere with verbal memory performance. We demonstrate that a combination of verbal short-term and working memory measures provides crucial information regarding the cognitive mechanisms underlying language disturbances in PPA. In addition, we propose that analogous visuospatial span tasks are essential for the assessment of PPA as they measure memory capacity without language contamination.

The term primary progressive aphasia (PPA) describes a group of neurodegenerative disorders with predominant speech and language dysfunction as their main feature. There are three main variants – the semantic variant, the nonfluent or agrammatic variant and the logopenic variant – each with specific linguistic deficits and different neuroanatomical involvement. There are currently no curative treatments or symptomatic pharmacological therapies. However, speech and language therapists have developed several impairment-based interventions and compensatory strategies for use in the clinic. Unfortunately, multiple barriers still need to be overcome to improve access to care for people with PPA, including increasing awareness among referring clinicians, improving training of speech and language therapists and developing evidence-based guidelines for therapeutic interventions. This review highlights this inequity and the reasons why neurologists should refer people with PPA to speech and language therapists.

Background: Word-finding difficulties are a frequent, frustrating problem for people with Primary Progressive Aphasia (PPA), for which lexical retrieval treatment is a preferred behavioural...

Primary progressive aphasia (PPA) is a complex language-led dementia syndrome whereby disproportionate deterioration of speech and language occurs subsequent to neurodegenerative disease in the early to mid-stages of the condition. As no effective pharmacotherapies are currently available, speech and language therapies are the optimum treatment to maximize communication for as long as possible.The authors present an overview of current speech-language therapy practices in PPA, highlighting recent research on effective treatments.The challenges in this complex field of practice are described. We highlight the challenge of improving access to speech-language therapy by advocating for increased referral rates. The authors also suggest effective incorporation of innovative technologies in treatment and an enhanced evidence base for the utility of lexical retrieval treatment in improving everyday communication as challenges for the future. Finally, increased provision of PPA-specific education and support for individuals and their families is required.

Evidence of generalization to connected speech following lexical retrieval treatment in Primary Progressive Aphasia (PPA) is scarce. Consequently, this study systematically investigated changes in verb phrase production following lexical retrieval treatment in a series of single case experimental design studies. Four individuals with PPA (three semantic- and one logopenic variant PPA) who had previously demonstrated that they could integrate verbs and nouns into sentence structures in a cueing paradigm, undertook a sequence of verb and noun lexical retrieval treatments using Repetition and Reading in the Presence of a Picture. Production of treated nouns- and/or verbs-in-isolation significantly improved following treatment for three of the four participants. Verb phrase production did not improve for one of these participants (logopenic PPA), perhaps due to the relatively small treatment dose. Two participants (semantic variant PPA) did, however, demonstrate across-level generalization, with improvement in treated verbs and using those verbs in (untreated) verb phrases. Their verb phrase production improved most after lexical retrieval treatment for both nouns and verbs, suggesting this combined approach may benefit across-level generalization for some individuals in clinical practice.

This study investigated whether a treatment programme for spoken word retrieval, supplemented with written naming, was beneficial for an individual with right-hemisphere dominant semantic variant of PPA (svPPA). Assessment and treatment were delivered remotely through Skype. Treatment consisted of two phases of lexical retrieval therapy (Repetition and Reading in the Presence of a Picture: RRIPP), with and without written responses (Phases 1 and 2 respectively), and a third treatment phase based on the procedures of Conceptual Enrichment (COEN) therapy. The first two phases of treatment resulted in short-lasting improvements in spoken and written word retrieval, with greater improvement in Phase 2 when written production was also required. Both treatment phases resulted in gains only for treated items, but generalised to different depictions to those treated. However, Phase 2 also resulted in significant improvement of treated items on a comprehension task. COEN treatment did not result in significant gains in word retrieval or comprehension. This study reinforces the value of a simple lexical retrieval treatment delivered remotely. It adds to the current evidence that anomia in svPPA can be responsive to treatment, but also shows that challenges remain regarding maintenance effects and the generalisation of treatment effects to connected speech.

Word-finding difficulty is typically an early and frustrating symptom of primary progressive aphasia (PPA), prompting investigations of lexical retrieval treatment in PPA. This study aimed to investigate immediate treatment gains following two versus four weeks of treatment, item generalisation, and maintenance of gains with ongoing treatment in a single case series of eight individuals with heterogeneous PPA presentations (three non-fluent/agrammatic, two logopenic, two semantic, and one mixed PPA). Three individuals made initial gains in picture naming and maintained them over 6 months or more with ongoing treatment. By contrast, three individuals made marginal initial gains but were unable to continue treatment, and two individuals did not make the typically-reported initial gains with two or four weeks of treatment. There was little evidence of generalisation to untreated items. Our results add to the evidence that daily home practice of Repetition and Reading in the Presence of a Picture over extended periods can increase and maintain retrieval of personally-relevant words in picture naming for some individuals with semantic or nonfluent/agrammatic variant PPA. Further research is needed into the factors associated with long-term treatment adherence and gains, and the factors associated with nonadherence to treatment.

Background:Primary progressive aphasia (PPA) affects a range of language and cognitive domains that impact on conversation. Little is known about conversation breakdown in the semantic variant of PPA (svPPA, also known as semantic dementia). This study investigates conversation of people with svPPA.Methods:Dyadic conversations about everyday activities between seven individuals with svPPA and their partners, and seven control pairs were video recorded and transcribed. Number of words, turns, and length of turns were measured. Trouble-indicating behaviors (TIBs) and repair behaviors were categorized and identified as successful or not for each participant in each dyad.Results:In general, individuals with svPPA were active participants in conversation, taking an equal proportion of turns, but indicating a great deal of more trouble in conversation, shown by the significantly higher number of TIBs than evidenced by partners or control participants. TIBs were interactive (asking for confirmation with a shorter repetition of the original utterance or a repetition which included a request for specific information) and non-interactive (such as failing to take up or continue the topic or a minimal response) and unlike those previously reported for people with other PPA variants and dementia of the Alzheimer type. Communication behaviors of the partner were critical to conversational success.Conclusions:Examination of trouble and repair in 10-min conversations of individuals with svPPA and their important communication partners has potential to inform speech pathology interventions to enhance successful conversation, in svPPA and should be an integral part of the comprehensive care plan.